Hi Folks, Apologies to anyone who'd prefer not to see this query on this list; but I'm asking because it is probably the forum where I'm most likely to get a good answer! I'm interested in the provenance of the name "normal distribution" (for what I'd really prefer to call the "Gaussian" distribution). According to Wikipedia, "The name "normal distribution" was coined independently by Charles S. Peirce, Francis Galton and Wilhelm Lexis around 1875." So be it, if that was the case -- but I would like to know why they chose the name "normal": what did they intend to convey? As background: I'm reflecting a bit on the usage in statistics of "everyday language" as techincal terms, as in "significantly different". This, for instance, is likely to be misunderstood by the general publidc when they encounter statements in the media. Likewise, "normally distributed" would probably be interpreted as "distributed in the way one would normally expect" or, perhaps, "there was nothing unusual about the distribution." Comments welcome! With thanks, Ted. -------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <Ted.Harding at manchester.ac.uk> Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 02-Mar-08 Time: 13:04:17 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
A nice survey of this territory is: http://books.google.com/books?id=TN3_d7ibo30C&pg=PA85&lpg=PA85&dq=stigler+normal+oxymoron&source=web&ots=OwGhmnDk3O&sig=J7ou_L8-_Mu4L14c3KJAhefrD4I&hl=en I particularly like the phrase: "[normal] is in this respect a rare one-word oxymoron." url: www.econ.uiuc.edu/~roger Roger Koenker email rkoenker at uiuc.edu Department of Economics vox: 217-333-4558 University of Illinois fax: 217-244-6678 Champaign, IL 61820 On Mar 2, 2008, at 7:33 AM, (Ted Harding) wrote:> Hi Folks, > Apologies to anyone who'd prefer not to see this query > on this list; but I'm asking because it is probably the > forum where I'm most likely to get a good answer! > > I'm interested in the provenance of the name "normal > distribution" (for what I'd really prefer to call the > "Gaussian" distribution). > > According to Wikipedia, "The name "normal distribution" > was coined independently by Charles S. Peirce, Francis > Galton and Wilhelm Lexis around 1875." > > So be it, if that was the case -- but I would like to > know why they chose the name "normal": what did they > intend to convey? > > As background: I'm reflecting a bit on the usage in > statistics of "everyday language" as techincal terms, > as in "significantly different". This, for instance, > is likely to be misunderstood by the general publidc > when they encounter statements in the media. > > Likewise, "normally distributed" would probably be > interpreted as "distributed in the way one would > normally expect" or, perhaps, "there was nothing > unusual about the distribution." > > Comments welcome! > With thanks, > Ted. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <Ted.Harding at manchester.ac.uk> > Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 > Date: 02-Mar-08 Time: 13:04:17 > ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------ > > ______________________________________________ > R-help at r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help > PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
roger koenker <roger <at> ysidro.econ.uiuc.edu> writes:> > A nice survey of this territory is: > >http://books.google.com/books?id=TN3_d7ibo30C&pg=PA85&lpg=PA85&dq=stigler+normal+oxymoron&source=web&ots=OwGhmnDk3O&sig=J7ou_L8-_Mu4L14c3KJAhefrD4I&hl=en> > I particularly like the phrase: "[normal] is in this respect > a rare one-word oxymoron." >Apparently (at least according to the all-knowing Internet), these are "contronyms" ( http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1217396 ). My favorite statistical example is "overdispersion", which in most of statistics means "more variance than expected", but in spatial statistics is also used to mean "more regular than a random distribution", i.e. "less variance than expected" (!!) cheers Ben
There is some information and references regarding the name 'normal' in the internet article 'Earliest Known Uses of Some of the Words of Mathematics (N)', http://members.aol.com/jeff570/n.html, by John Aldrich. It contains the comment, "Galton does not explain why he uses the term "normal" but the sense of conforming to a norm ( = 'A standard, model, pattern, type.' (OED)) seems implied." On Sun, 2 Mar 2008 Ted.Harding at manchester.ac.uk wrote:> Hi Folks, > Apologies to anyone who'd prefer not to see this query > on this list; but I'm asking because it is probably the > forum where I'm most likely to get a good answer! > > I'm interested in the provenance of the name "normal > distribution" (for what I'd really prefer to call the > "Gaussian" distribution). > > According to Wikipedia, "The name "normal distribution" > was coined independently by Charles S. Peirce, Francis > Galton and Wilhelm Lexis around 1875." > > So be it, if that was the case -- but I would like to > know why they chose the name "normal": what did they > intend to convey? > > As background: I'm reflecting a bit on the usage in > statistics of "everyday language" as techincal terms, > as in "significantly different". This, for instance, > is likely to be misunderstood by the general publidc > when they encounter statements in the media. > > Likewise, "normally distributed" would probably be > interpreted as "distributed in the way one would > normally expect" or, perhaps, "there was nothing > unusual about the distribution." > > Comments welcome! > With thanks, > Ted. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <Ted.Harding at manchester.ac.uk> > Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 > Date: 02-Mar-08 Time: 13:04:17 > ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------ > > ______________________________________________ > R-help at r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help > PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. >
As someone of partly French heritage, I would also ask how this distribution came to be called "Gaussian". It seems very unfair to de Moivre, who discovered the distribution at least half a century earlier. :-) --Jim Rogers On Mar 2, 2008, at 7:33 AM, (Ted Harding) wrote:> Hi Folks, > Apologies to anyone who'd prefer not to see this query > on this list; but I'm asking because it is probably the > forum where I'm most likely to get a good answer! > > I'm interested in the provenance of the name "normal > distribution" (for what I'd really prefer to call the > "Gaussian" distribution). > > According to Wikipedia, "The name "normal distribution" > was coined independently by Charles S. Peirce, Francis > Galton and Wilhelm Lexis around 1875." > > So be it, if that was the case -- but I would like to > know why they chose the name "normal": what did they > intend to convey? > > As background: I'm reflecting a bit on the usage in > statistics of "everyday language" as techincal terms, > as in "significantly different". This, for instance, > is likely to be misunderstood by the general publidc > when they encounter statements in the media. > > Likewise, "normally distributed" would probably be > interpreted as "distributed in the way one would > normally expect" or, perhaps, "there was nothing > unusual about the distribution." > > Comments welcome! > With thanks, > Ted. >
Douglas Bates wrote: > ... > Taking this to a whole new level of "off topic", I wonder if Stigler's > Law is self-referential? That is, should Stigler's Law more correctly > be attributed to someone else? The complaint has been around for a long time. Zeno's paradox "Achilles and the tortoise" is said to have been first enunciated by Parmenides. Perhaps Stigler should have titled his paper "Stigler's Law of Lathosonyms". Jim